Steven Spielberg's movie about Lincoln is pure bullshit !!!!!!!

[koshergrl]

Heck, slaves have certainly had their revenge....................

Endless reparations, third world policies, ghetto crime, rampant drug use, and guilt ridden white liberals to kiss their ass at every turn...............IMPRESSIVE

and you wonder why people of color don't vote for you people?

lol

jillian, it is always a little bit laughable when a privileged member of the non-colored elite tells us what motivates "people of color"......

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The fact that Southern States seceded over slavery in no way proves that the Northern States fought over slavery. Unless, of course, you think we fought WWII because Germany was being oppressed by Europe.

Germany was being oppressed by Europe.

Spoken like a true WN.

.

That, believe it or not, is why Germany went to war. The fact that you don't know that is extremely telling.

 

[paperview]

Strange, I don't see anything about slavery here.

You are being typically selective.

You, too, need to read the declarations of secession. The rebel states clearly stated they were leaving over slavery. They left no shadow of a doubt.

You also need to read the letter Lincoln wrote to Albert Hodges to which I linked above. In that letter it becomes crystal clear Lincoln is stating the war is about slavery.

Despite his absolute detestation of slavery, keeping the country together had to take precedence.

.

Can I point out the obvious here?

A declaration of secession is not a declaration of war. I posted the Declaration of War published on behalf of the Northern States, feel free to point out where it discusses slavery to prove me wrong. In the meantime, I will stick to my position that the North did not go to war over slavery.

The North DIDN'T go to war over slavery. They went to war to preserve the Union.

The South went to to war to preserve slavery.

 

[jillian]

Strange, I don't see anything about slavery here.

Seriously??? Are you able to read the English language???

rhetorical question?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The South went to war over slavery, and Lincoln co-opted the issue in the summer of 1862, putting the South in an indefensible position thus preventing France and England from recognizing the South.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Oh geezes.

They laid out the REASONS why they were going to war. This isn't hard. It was to preserve slavery.

Christ on a cracker. THINK!

Educate yourself.

Ordinances of Secession of the 13 Confederate States of America

 

[JakeStarkey]

Paperview has dozens of primary documents that will make you cry, QWB. She will love to post them for your education.

Just ask her!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Can I point out the obvious here?

A declaration of secession is not a declaration of war. I posted the Declaration of War published on behalf of the Northern States, feel free to point out where it discusses slavery to prove me wrong. In the meantime, I will stick to my position that the North did not go to war over slavery.

A declaration of secession is treason...and is a declaration of war.

it doesn't need to state it was about slavery.. it was clearly about slavery.

don't be obtuse.

I think you have a sliding definition of treason that is just as partisan as the idiots that accuse Obama of treason. If Lincoln had chosen to use other methods of dealing with the problem war could easily have been avoided.

If the North went to war over slavery why didn't Lincoln make that point when he called up the militia.

 

[Katzndogz]

You are being typically selective.

You, too, need to read the declarations of secession. The rebel states clearly stated they were leaving over slavery. They left no shadow of a doubt.

You also need to read the letter Lincoln wrote to Albert Hodges to which I linked above. In that letter it becomes crystal clear Lincoln is stating the war is about slavery.

Despite his absolute detestation of slavery, keeping the country together had to take precedence.

.

Can I point out the obvious here?

A declaration of secession is not a declaration of war. I posted the Declaration of War published on behalf of the Northern States, feel free to point out where it discusses slavery to prove me wrong. In the meantime, I will stick to my position that the North did not go to war over slavery.

The North DIDN'T go to war over slavery. They went to war to preserve the Union.

The South went to to war to preserve slavery.

Neither is true, but this is probably what the schools are teaching nowadays.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Lincoln went war to preserve the Union, the South went to war preserve slavery.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You are being typically selective.

You, too, need to read the declarations of secession. The rebel states clearly stated they were leaving over slavery. They left no shadow of a doubt.

You also need to read the letter Lincoln wrote to Albert Hodges to which I linked above. In that letter it becomes crystal clear Lincoln is stating the war is about slavery.

Despite his absolute detestation of slavery, keeping the country together had to take precedence.

.

Can I point out the obvious here?

A declaration of secession is not a declaration of war. I posted the Declaration of War published on behalf of the Northern States, feel free to point out where it discusses slavery to prove me wrong. In the meantime, I will stick to my position that the North did not go to war over slavery.

The North DIDN'T go to war over slavery. They went to war to preserve the Union.

The South went to to war to preserve slavery.

Keep telling yourself that.

 

[Katzndogz]

If the North went to war over slavery, how come slavery wasn't even mentioned until two years into the war?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Do you not read the scholars who do this for a living?

Do you not read the primary documents of the age?

Or you going to continue your Reign of the Doofus?

Can I point out the obvious here?

A declaration of secession is not a declaration of war. I posted the Declaration of War published on behalf of the Northern States, feel free to point out where it discusses slavery to prove me wrong. In the meantime, I will stick to my position that the North did not go to war over slavery.

The North DIDN'T go to war over slavery. They went to war to preserve the Union.

The South went to to war to preserve slavery.

Neither is true, but this is probably what the schools are teaching nowadays.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Paperview has dozens of primary documents that will make you cry, QWB. She will love to post them for your education.

Just ask her!

I have seen them, I just posted some that prove that not every state thought slavery was the driving force for secession.

 

[paperview]

The fact that Southern States seceded over slavery in no way proves that the Northern States fought over slavery. Unless, of course, you think we fought WWII because Germany was being oppressed by Europe.

Jesus this is some fucked up illogic.

The southern states left to preserve slavery. So obviously the war was about slavery, dipshit. If there was no slavery, there was no war.

Before the war: slavery. After the war: no slavery.




.

Tell you what, why don't you show me where North Carolina declared that slavery was a reason for secession. In fact, why don't you show me where that can be said about Florida, Louisiana, Arkansas, Tennessee, Missouri, and Kentucky.

Alternatively, you could stop cherry picking facts.

Hang on...sorry for the long one here folks:

I guess all these states actually telling us why they were seceding was a myth too.

Louisiana:

"Louisiana looks to the formation of a Southern confederacy to preserve the blessings of African slavery, and of the free institutions of the founders of the Federal Union, bequeathed to their posterity...

The people of Louisiana would consider it a most fatal blow to African slavery, if Texas either did not secede or having seceded should not join her destinies to theirs in a Southern Confederacy. If she remains in the union the abolitionists would continue their work of incendiarism and murder. Emigrant aid societies would arm with Sharp's rifles predatory bands to infest her northern borders. The Federal Government would mock at her calamity in accepting the recent bribes in the army bill and Pacific railroad bill, and with abolition treachery would leave her unprotected frontier to the murderous inroads of hostile savages....

That constitution the Southern States have never violated, and taking it as the basis of our new government we hope to form a slave-holding confederacy that will secure to us and our remotest posterity the great blessings its authors designed in the Federal Union. With the social balance wheel of slavery to regulate its machinery, we may fondly indulge the hope that our Southern government will be perpetual."

Geo. Williamson
Commissioner of the State of Louisiana
City of Austin Feby 11th 1861.
Address of George Williamson to the Texas Secession Convention
​

The plea from South Carolina to the other southern states:

"We prefer, however, our system of industry, by which labor and capital are identified in interest, and capital, therefore, protects labor; by which our population doubles every twenty years; by which starvation is unknown, and abundance crowns the land; by which order is preserved by unpaid police, and the most fertile regions of the world where the Caucasian cannot labor are brought into usefulness by the labor of the African, and the whole world is blessed by our own productions....

We ask you to join us in forming a confederacy of Slaveholding States."
Address of South Carolina to Slaveholding States by Convention of South Carolina
Texas:

The States of Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan and Iowa, by solemn legislative enactments, have deliberately, directly or indirectly violated the 3rd clause of the 2nd section of the 4th article [the fugitive slave clause] of the federal constitution, and laws passed in pursuance thereof; thereby annulling a material provision of the compact, designed by its framers to perpetuate the amity between the members of the confederacy and to secure the rights of the slave-holding States in their domestic institutions-- a provision founded in justice and wisdom, and without the enforcement of which the compact fails to accomplish the object of its creation. Some of those States have imposed high fines and degrading penalties upon any of their citizens or officers who may carry out in good faith that provision of the compact, or the federal laws enacted in accordance therewith.

"In all the non-slave-holding States, in violation of that good faith and comity which should exist between entirely distinct nations, the people have formed themselves into a great sectional party, now strong enough in numbers to control the affairs of each of those States, based upon an unnatural feeling of hostility to these Southern States and their beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery, proclaiming the debasing doctrine of equality of all men, irrespective of race or color-- a doctrine at war with nature, in opposition to the experience of mankind, and in violation of the plainest revelations of Divine Law. They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States.
Avalon Project - Confederate States of America - A Declaration of the Causes which Impel the State of Texas to Secede from the Federal Union​

Speech to Tennessee Legislature by the Governor:

In discharge of official duty, I had occasion, within the past year, to demand of the Governor of Ohio " a person charged in the State (of Tennessee) with the crime " of slave stealing, who had fled from justice, and was found in the State of Ohio.' The Governor refused to issue his warrant for the arrest and delivery of the fugitive, and in answer to a letter of inquiry which I addressed to him, said: 'The crime of negro stealing not being known to either the common law or the criminal code of Ohio, it is not of that class of crimes contemplated by the Federal Constitution, for the commission of which I am authorized, as the executive of Ohio, to surrender a fugitive from the justice of a sister State, and hence I declined to issue a warrant," &c.; thus deliberately nullifying and setting at defiance the clause of the Constitution above quoted, as well as the act of Congress of February 12th, 1793, and grossly violating the ordinary comity existing between separate and independent nations, much less the comity which should exist between sister States of the same great Confederacy; the correspondence connected with which is herewith transmitted.
​

It has, through the executive authority of other States, denied extradition of murderers and marauders.
​

It obtained its own compromise in the Constitution to continue the importation of slaves, and now sets up a law, higher than the Constitution, to destroy this property imported and sold to us by their fathers.

It has caused the murder of owners in pursuit of their fugitive slaves, and shielded the murderers from punishment.

It has, upon many occasions, sent its emissaries into the Southern States to corrupt our slaves; induce them to run off, or excite them to insurrection.

It has run off slave property by means of the "underground railroad," amounting in value to millions of dollars, and thus made the tenure by which slaves are held in the border States so precarious as to materially impair their value.
Alabama."
Speech of Tennessee Governor Isham G. Harris for Secession
​

(I particularly like this speech; if slavery was abolished and slaves set free, then Whites would be forced to commit murder!):

ALABAMA:

"I wish, Mr. President, to express the feelings with which I vote for the secession of Alabama from the Government of the United States; and to state, in a few words, the reasons that impel me to this act.

I feel impelled, Mr. President, to vote for this Ordinance by an overruling necessity. Years ago I was convinced that the Southern States would be compelled either to separate from the North, by dissolving the Federal Government, or they would be compelled to abolish the institution of African Slavery. This, in my judgment, was the only alternative; and I foresaw that the South would be compelled, at some day, to make her selection. The day is now come, and Alabama must make her selection, either to secede from the Union, and assume the position of a sovereign, independent State, or she must submit to a system of policy on the part of the Federal Government that, in a short time, will compel her to abolish African Slavery.
​

Mr. President, if pecuniary loss alone were involved in the abolition of slavery, I should hesitate long before I would give the vote I now intend to give. If the destruction of slavery entailed on us poverty alone, I could bear it, for I have seen poverty and felt its sting. But poverty, Mr. President, would be one of the least of the evils that would befall us from the abolition of African slavery. There are now in the slaveholding States over four millions of slaves; dissolve the relation of master and slave, and what, I ask, would become of that race? To remove them from amongst us is impossible. History gives us no account of the exodus of such a number of persons. We neither have a place to which to remove them, nor the means of such removal. They therefore must remain with us; and if the relation of master and slave be dissolved, and our slaves turned loose amongst us without restraint, they would either be destroyed by our own hands-- the hands to which they look, and look with confidence, for protection-- or we ourselves would become demoralized and degraded. The former result would take place, and we ourselves would become the executioners of our own slaves. To this extent would the policy of our Northern enemies drive us; and thus would we not only be reduced to poverty, but what is still worse, we should be driven to crime, to the commission of sin; and we must, therefore, this day elect between the Government formed by our fathers (the whole spirit of which has been perverted), and POVERTY AND CRIME!
Speech of E.S. Dargan Secession Convention of Alabama 1861
​

South Carolina:

Quote:
The Constitution of the United States, in its fourth Article, provides as follows: "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due." [Fugitive Slave Clause]

This stipulation was so material to the compact, that without it that compact would not have been made. The greater number of the contracting parties held slaves, and they had previously evinced their estimate of the value of such a stipulation by making it a condition in the Ordinance for the government of the territory ceded by Virginia, which now composes the States north of the Ohio River.

The same article of the Constitution stipulates also for rendition by the several States of fugitives from justice from the other States.

The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them.
In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.

The ends for which the Constitution was framed are declared by itself to be "to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."

These ends it endeavored to accomplish by a Federal Government, in which each State was recognized as an equal, and had separate control over its own institutions. The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor.

We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.
Avalon Project - Confederate States of America - Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union

Mississippi:

Quote:
Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.
Avalon Project - Confederate States of America - Mississippi Secession

Georgia:

For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery...

All these classes saw this and felt it and cast about for new allies. The anti-slavery sentiment of the North offered the best chance for success. An anti-slavery party must necessarily look to the North alone for support, but a united North was now strong enough to control the Government in all of its departments, and a sectional party was therefore determined upon. Time and issues upon slavery were necessary to its completion and final triumph. The feeling of anti-slavery, which it was well known was very general among the people of the North, had been long dormant or passive; it needed only a question to arouse it into aggressive activity. This question was before us. We had acquired a large territory by successful war with Mexico; Congress had to govern it; how, in relation to slavery, was the question then demanding solution. This state of facts gave form and shape to the anti-slavery sentiment throughout the North and the conflict began. Northern anti-slavery men of all parties asserted the right to exclude slavery from the territory by Congressional legislation and demanded the prompt and efficient exercise of this power to that end. This insulting and unconstitutional demand was met with great moderation and firmness by the South...
​

The prohibition of slavery in the Territories, hostility to it everywhere, the equality of the black and white races, disregard of all constitutional guarantees in its favor, were boldly proclaimed by its leaders and applauded by its followers.

With these principles on their banners and these utterances on their lips the majority of the people of the North demand that we shall receive them as our rulers.

But they know the value of parchment rights in treacherous hands, and therefore they refuse to commit their own to the rulers whom the North offers us. Why? Because by their declared principles and policy they have outlawed $3,000,000,000 of our property** in the common territories of the Union; put it under the ban of the Republic in the States where it exists and out of the protection of Federal law everywhere; because they give sanctuary to thieves and incendiaries who assail it to the whole extent of their power, in spite of their most solemn obligations and covenants; because their avowed purpose is to subvert our society and subject us not only to the loss of our property but the destruction of ourselves, our wives, and our children, and the desolation of our homes, our altars, and our firesides. To avoid these evils we resume the powers which our fathers delegated to the Government of the United States, and henceforth will seek new safeguards for our liberty, equality, security, and tranquility.
​

**property = humans
Georgia Declarations of Causes of Seceding States Civil War

Confederate Constitution Secession Articles of American Civil War

 

[JakeStarkey]

Game, set, match.

 

[jillian]

Heck, slaves have certainly had their revenge....................

Endless reparations, third world policies, ghetto crime, rampant drug use, and guilt ridden white liberals to kiss their ass at every turn...............IMPRESSIVE

and you wonder why people of color don't vote for you people?

lol

jillian, it is always a little bit laughable when a privileged member of the non-colored elite tells us what motivates "people of color"......

you mean like when old white men tell us what rape is? and what women should do with their bodies, sweetie?

and i wasn't privileged when i was young... unless you count having a decent school, a decent place to live and loving family and friends as being 'privileged'... in which case, i'm happy to cop to it.

but if you mean 'privileged' as in money... not til i was an adult.

but the right's been whining about how black people don't vote for you. that's why.

or do you think they're stupid enough not to understand how racist that is?

 

[JakeStarkey]

koshergrl just got jillian slapped!

 

[paperview]

Can I point out the obvious here?

A declaration of secession is not a declaration of war. I posted the Declaration of War published on behalf of the Northern States, feel free to point out where it discusses slavery to prove me wrong. In the meantime, I will stick to my position that the North did not go to war over slavery.

The North DIDN'T go to war over slavery. They went to war to preserve the Union.

The South went to to war to preserve slavery.

Neither is true, but this is probably what the schools are teaching nowadays.

This from the guy who thought the cotton gin freed many slaves.

 

[paperview]

Paperview has dozens of primary documents that will make you cry, QWB. She will love to post them for your education.

Just ask her!

I have seen them, I just posted some that prove that not every state thought slavery was the driving force for secession.

In order to give your premise any quarter whatsoever, you have to ignore all that led up to the war, including
the decades long increasingly embittered debate that took place in Congress, in states houses, in pulpits, on soapboxes, and in practically every newspaper and journal in the country.
It was THE topic.

You'd also have to ignore
The Compromise of 1850
the Kansas-Nebraska Act
Bleeding Kansas
The Dred Scott decision
The John Brown Affair
and the myriad other intensities growing wildfire by 1860 to reach his convoluted conclusions.

You also have to ignore:

- the declarations of the causes of secession that gave slavery as the reason for the rebellion,
-the secession commissioners that gave slavery as the reason for the rebellion
-the newspaper editorials that gave slavery as the reason for the rebellion

I guess they were all lying.

You'd have to make a case virtually all of the southern leadership was lying in order to get their people to fight for them

Just think about that.